BUCKINGHAM
Londoners seethed with excitement as the news of what was taking place reached them. During this memorable first week of May the Duke of Buckingham came to Parliament with an unwontedly shabby equippage, cMy Lord Duke came to the House in an old coach, some three footmen, and no attendance5. In strange contrast, the Earl of Bristol was strikingly gay, for he appeared at Westminster 'with eight horses, his own horse brave and rich with cloth of gold and tissue*.1 It is most likely that Buckingham was anxious not to arouse popular resentment by his usual display, and felt that a show of poverty would best serve his cause in the present crisis. It was universally affirmed that the King would support Buckingham to the end, not stopping at a dissolution should matters reach too dangerous a height, and Bristol's life was popularly adjudged to hang upon a very slight thread.
On the appointed day there was a breathless gathering in the Upper House to hear the Attorney-General read the Kong's charges against the Earl of Bristol. The attempt to change Charles's religion was, naturally, the main accusation, together with a statement that Bristol had concealed the fact that the Spaniards were not in earnest over their promises, and had thereby compelled Charles to have to journey to Madrid, at great personal risk, to find out the truth for himself. Furthermore, the Earl had doubted one of Buckingham's statements in his relation to the Parliament of 1624, which the King had affirmed to be true. Bristol had thus indirectly given His Majesty the lie. Such charges were patently forced, and did not weigh in the balance nearly so heavily as those which Bristol proceeded to advance against Buckingham.
Boldly Bristol now brought forth his accusations against the Duke, although he must have known that his temerity
1 ELLIS, Original Letters, Series I, vol. m, p. 334. 232